Chuck Sweeny: Readers divided on First Amendment column

Wednesday

Oct 9, 2013 at 6:59 PM

Once again I want to share with you some of the things readers have been saying about recent work I've done. As is usual for my columns, some agree, some do not, which keeps this job lively. Tuesday I took issue with Gov. Pat Quinn's office for attempting to tell us that one of our columnists does not work for a legitimate journalism company because he's employed by a conservative think tank. I said that government (through its spokesmen,) is limited by the First Amendment so that it doesn't get to define journalism. That is reserved for the people and the press. These comments are from Facebook and email.

David J. Soll wrote, "Perhaps journalists would be better served of their wanting to be truly independent if our print media didn't have parent companies? Isn't the Register Star owned by an entity that has no direct ties to our area? How wonderful and better served would local communities be if their media was owned by the very community they served? I would even go a step further and say that print media is subject to the will of those companies that spend tons of money on advertising. That allows the potential for skewed reporting, or no reporting at all. A completely free and independent media is the only media that can be trusted at all."

Robert King wrote, "Chuck, I agree!! If the politicians defined it, the public would get a very slanted view of what really happened. There would also be truths left uncovered, therefore leaving the public in the dark. Media is not the enemy, especially to those who are honest and really want to be a servant to the public. There are so many politicians who have a problem with transparency and blame the media for reporting on their private thoughts that should be exposed. Unfortunately this mind set cheats the public they are supposed to serve!!"

Aaron C. Burke wrote, "Self-serving columns editorials and columns are unprofessional. The Star runs those a lot. Case in point is Chuck Sweeny's October 8 column, 'Politicians don't get to define journalism.' The gist is 'I / we are right, and you are wrong.' They come across as petulant. Besides the pouty tone, Sweeny's column lacked substance. The First Amendment protects politicians as much as journalists. Governor Pat Quinn's office spokesperson commenting on a Star column is hardly censorship, although it should be beneath their notice to give any credence to such paltry snipes."

Dick Kulpa wrote, "Ehhh...I don't agree, Chuck. If I read 'news' from any agenda-based 'tainted' organization, it is generally disregarded by me. If I know the source is agenda-based, I don't read it, period.

Those ain't journalists...they're PR people charged with presenting 'fact' under conditions favorable to their cause. Yes, they collect information for presentation...it's that end filter that skews things. The argument that 'because Soros and the Kochs do it,' does not wash. Agenda is agenda. Truth is secondary to them. I do agree with your other points."